Siempre me han interesado los personajes al margen, esos que aparecen en el fondo de la foto. Supongo que tiene que ver con lo que un amigo una vez llamó el síndrome del ‘underdog’: esto de echarle vítores al tipo(a) que parece que no tiene oportunidad, pero que en el último segundo…
En fin. De ahí que me llaman la atención los escritores que no juegan de escritores: aquellos que no encontrás en un festival, en un lugar público, los que no se codean con grupos de colegas para sentirse (ligeramente) importantes. Los escritores más admirados por mi parte que he conocido en la vida, algunos, no muchos, me han parecido esquivos, lejos del foco de la cámara, aunque ésta les busque.
Hago nexo con Cormac McCarthy y pongo un extracto de una entrevista que le hizo el Wall Street Journal. McCarthy es uno de estos raros ejemplares que no se dejan ver por ningún lado, y que parece prefiere jugar poker a reunirse en círculos de escritores. Ha concedido más entrevistas en años recientes, debido al éxito que ha obtenido con la adaptación de varias de sus novelas en la pantalla grande. Se deja decir, sin embargo, que a pesar de la fama, parece seguir siendo un tipo bastante humilde y centrado.
Un aplauso. Si tan sólo todos pudieran ser así…
The Wall Street Journal: When you sell the rights to your books, do the contracts give you some oversight over the screenplay, or is it out of your hands?
Mr. McCarthy: No, you sell it and you go home and go to bed. You don't embroil yourself in somebody else's project.
WSJ: When you first went to the film set, how did it compare with how you saw "The Road" in your head?
CM: I guess my notion of what was going on in "The Road" did not include 60 to 80 people and a bunch of cameras. [Director] Dick Pearce and I made a film in North Carolina about 30 years ago and I thought, "This is just hell. Who would do this?" Instead, I get up and have a cup of coffee and wander around and read a little bit, sit down and type a few words and look out the window.
WSJ: But is there something compelling about the collaborative process compared to the solitary job of writing?
CM: Yes, it would compel you to avoid it at all costs.
WSJ: People have said "Blood Meridian" is unfilmable because of the sheer darkness and violence of the story.
CM: That's all crap. The fact that's it's a bleak and bloody story has nothing to do with whether or not you can put it on the screen. That's not the issue. The issue is it would be very difficult to do and would require someone with a bountiful imagination and a lot of balls. But the payoff could be extraordinary.
WSJ: How does the notion of aging and death affect the work you do? Has it become more urgent?
CM: Your future gets shorter and you recognize that. In recent years, I have had no desire to do anything but work and be with [son] John. I hear people talking about going on a vacation or something and I think, what is that about? I have no desire to go on a trip. My perfect day is sitting in a room with some blank paper. That's heaven. That's gold and anything else is just a waste of time.
WSJ: How does that ticking clock affect your work? Does it make you want to write more shorter pieces, or to cap things with a large, all-encompassing work?
CM: I'm not interested in writing short stories. Anything that doesn't take years of your life and drive you to suicide hardly seems worth doing.
WSJ: The last five years have seemed very productive for you. Have there been fallow periods in your writing?
CM: I don't think there's any rich period or fallow period. That's just a perception you get from what's published. Your busiest day might be watching some ants carrying bread crumbs. Someone asked Flannery O'Connor why she wrote, and she said, "Because I was good at it." And I think that's the right answer. If you're good at something it's very hard not to do it. In talking to older people who've had good lives, inevitably half of them will say, "The most significant thing in my life is that I've been extraordinarily lucky." And when you hear that you know you're hearing the truth. It doesn't diminish their talent or industry. You can have all that and fail.
WSJ: Is the God that you grew up with in church every Sunday the same God that the man in "The Road" questions and curses?
CM: It may be. I have a great sympathy for the spiritual view of life, and I think that it's meaningful. But am I a spiritual person? I would like to be. Not that I am thinking about some afterlife that I want to go to, but just in terms of being a better person. I have friends at the Institute. They're just really bright guys who do really difficult work solving difficult problems, who say, "It's really more important to be good than it is to be smart." And I agree it is more important to be good than it is to be smart. That is all I can offer you.
WSJ: Because "The Road" is so personal, did you have any hesitations about seeing it adapted?
CM: No. I've seen John's film ["The Proposition"] and I knew him somewhat by reputation and I thought he'd probably do a good job in respect to the material. Also, my agent [Amanda Urban], she's just the best. She wasn't going to sell the book to somebody unless she had some confidence in what they would do with it. It's not just a matter of money.
WSJ: Do you feel like you're trying to address the same big questions in all your work, but just in different ways?
CM: Creative work is often driven by pain. It may be that if you don't have something in the back of your head driving you nuts, you may not do anything. It's not a good arrangement. If I were God, I wouldn't have done it that way. Things I've written about are no longer of any interest to me, but they were certainly of interest before I wrote about them. So there's something about writing about it that flattens them. You've used them up. I tell people I've never read one of my books, and that's true. They think I'm pulling their leg.
WSJ: Earlier you referred to the role luck plays in life. Where has luck intervened for you?
CM: There was never a person born since Adam who's been luckier than me. Nothing has happened to me that hasn't been perfect. And I'm not being facetious. There's never been a time when I was penniless and down, when something wouldn't arrive. Over and over and over again. Enough to make you superstitious.
Gracias, McCarthy.
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
2 comentarios:
Es curioso, pero cuando se escucha en palabras de otra persona exactamente lo que uno piensa sobre algo (cualquier cosa), estalla una sensación de satisfacción y cercanía por esa persona.
Cuando esa persona está en una posición de poder (éxito incluso) la sensación se arrima más bien a una especie de "confirmación/revelación" de una idea o quizás, un método propio que hasta entonces se aplicaba con la sospecha de ser una estupidez.
Creo que puedo resumir esos dos párrafos en uno más pequeño y menos pretencioso: Yo también confío en emociones cercanas al dolor para detonar el proceso creativo, y me tranquiliza notar que alguien más lo hace.
La felicidad y la plenitud a veces parecen aburridas por sencillas. Arrastran una sensación de "todo resuelto" que no parece muy fértil.
¿Tendrá la racionalidad de la modernidad algo que ver con la "preferencia creativa" hacia lo no resuelto?
Me gustó mucho la entrevista. Aquí cabe un agradecimiento por haberla compartido.
Entonces, gracias... por lo de la entrevista y el espacio para divagar.
Una lección tu entrevista Lucho.
Publicar un comentario en la entrada